Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals, Declares Preliminary Decree in Partition Suit Not Vitiated by Fraud
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed a series of appeals and declared that the preliminary decree in a partition suit was not vitiated by fraud. The bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Mithal delivered the judgment on June 15, 2023.
The court emphasized that the High Court erred in declaring the preliminary decree to be vitiated by fraud without sufficient evidence or pleadings. The observations of fraud were confined to specific land and were not binding on the State Government. Quoting from the judgment, the court stated, “The High Court went overboard in holding the preliminary decree to be vitiated by fraud, after the same had attained finality in several proceedings, including those initiated by the State Government.”
The appeals arose from various Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) filed by different parties, including Trinity Infraventures Ltd., Sameena Kausar and others, and Fareeduddin Khan and others. The court dismissed these appeals, upholding the validity of the preliminary decree.
Furthermore, the court addressed the issue of the sale deed executed by a power agent after the principal’s death. While the appellants questioned the validity of the sale, claiming that the principal was not impleaded in the suit before his demise, the court noted that further verification was required regarding the date of impleadment. Quoting the judgment, the court stated, “Due to lack of specific information on the date of impleadment, final determination on validity cannot be made. Applicant’s contention requires further verification.”
The court also dismissed an application filed by an Asset Reconstruction Company seeking intervention. The company claimed that public money was at stake due to an equitable mortgage created by deposit of title deeds. However, the court held that the company’s previous impleadment applications had been dismissed, and it could not piggyback on appeals filed by others.
Additionally, a Cooperative Housing Society filed an application seeking impleadment and directions in the appeals. The society challenged the High Court’s declaration of the preliminary decree as vitiated by fraud. The court dismissed the application, stating that the society’s contentions could not be entertained through an application for clarification, as a review petition was already pending.
The Supreme Court’s ruling brings clarity to the validity of the preliminary decree in the partition suit and sets a precedent for future cases. The decision affirms the importance of providing sufficient evidence and pleadings before declaring a decree as vitiated by fraud.
